So here was your original post:
(outwith our run to the semi-final of the Champions League, where we were cheated by a Marseille side who had paid the ref to throw that game and the final and which were prosecuted, and the trophy going to AC Milan, without us getting to play them for it 
You then repeat part of that claim yesterday:
No, that post is very valid.
Marseille did indeed bribe the ref in a match which the winner of, went through to the final of the Champions League. Now I know you're going to say "but it was in the groups" but we finished 2nd in that group, which means we finished in the 3rd/4th spots, which would today be where the semi-finalist's finish.
We were indeed cheated back then, and not given the chance to play Milan in the final.
Marseille did indeed bribe the ref in a match which the winner of, went through to the final of the Champions League. Now I know you're going to say "but it was in the groups" but we finished 2nd in that group, which means we finished in the 3rd/4th spots, which would today be where the semi-finalist's finish.
We were indeed cheated back then, and not given the chance to play Milan in the final.
I repeat what I said in response to your first post above, which you seem keen to ignore:
Marseille were not stripped of their 92/93 CL win. They were stripped of their French title that season, demoted a division and banned from defending the European Cup after it had emerged that they had fixed a league game against Valenciennes.
So, as I asked – Where do you get it that........
1 - That they were prosecuted for getting the referee to throw a group game against your lot (note: not a semi-final)
2 - That they were prosecuted for getting the referee to throw the final against Milan?
3 - That the trophy went to AC Milan?
